Compound 20

[chimeranD]

Nice of USP to avoid replying to the actual discussion, and instead try to avert attention with a post to another dispute (especially one that's already been covered plenty in other threads).

 

[strategicmove]

Nice of USP to avoid replying to the actual discussion, and instead try to avert attention with a post to another dispute (especially one that's already been covered plenty in other threads).

So what exactly do you want to discuss that has not been thrashed already? I always chuckle when people turn up from every nook and corner in a thread challenging USPlabs' products, and all in a sudden pretend to be world-class scientists. And by the way, even those scientists are not infallible. People should present evidence that the product does not work, and when I say evidence, I mean a peer-reviewed double-blind placebo-controlled study. Any thing else does not cut it! I personally have no qualms about scientific arguments, when I know the other side is open to fresh insights. However, I consider it a complete waste of time when such discussion is driven more by subjectivity and bias than fluid scientific judgement. In this case, as in a few others of a similar nature, I consider an extension of the discussion completely futile, and as a consequence a total waste of time.

 

[Geoforce]

So what exactly do you want to discuss that has not been thrashed already? I always chuckle when people turn up from every nook and corner in a thread challenging USPlabs' products, and all in a sudden pretend to be world-class scientists. And by the way, even those scientists are not infallible. People should present evidence that the product does not work, and when I say evidence, I mean a peer-reviewed double-blind placebo-controlled study. Any thing else does not cut it! I personally have no qualms about scientific arguments, when I know the other side is open to fresh insights. However, I consider it a complete waste of time when such discussion is driven more by subjectivity and bias than fluid scientific judgement. In this case, as in a few others of a similar nature, I consider an extension of the discussion completely futile, and as a consequence a total waste of time.

Why is the burden on proving it doesn't work instead of proving it does? After all this is a supplement a company is asking us to spend over 50 dollars on. Mad Chemist's concerns have no weight or bearing because he hasn't performed a double blind placebo controlled study on it? So if I said eat Dove soap for great gains the burden would be on someone to prove it doesn't work? And that they need a study to do it?

I'm not taking sides as I have no dogs in any fight, but am interested in discussion and science always. These debates by people like USP-Edu and Mad Chemist are how we learn.

 

[Whacked]

I think you bring up some fair points and I can apreciate the frustration of being attacked to a degree.

I think USP puts out some quality stuff (as I have belabored to death now), but with all due respect to USP Labs, I think the magazine and internet type ads BEG for this type of adverse attention (from the over the top claims).

That said, USP is in business to make money, not lead a church congregation to an higher moral status. So if this is the the strategy, it certainly works as they are highly successful/making fat cash so screw it, if its legal, knock yourself out. However, to make my point, such advertising strategies come with a cost. You witness this/the slight recoil/challenging in threads like these.

People should present evidence that the product does not work, and when I say evidence, I mean a peer-reviewed double-blind placebo-controlled study. Any thing else does not cut it!

Hmmm... similarly then, wouldnt it make sense for the Supplement Companies to do the exact same when presenting their argument. IMHO, the burden of proof is on the Company who is making hyped up "sexy" claims and trying to move product and not on the consumer.

However, I consider it a complete waste of time when such discussion is driven more by subjectivity and bias than fluid scientific judgement. In this case, as in a few others of a similar nature, I consider an extension of the discussion completely futile, and as a consequence a total waste of time.

In lieu of your postion as a company Rep, do you honestly want everyone to believe that your comments arent driven by bias too?

It's sort of accepted by people on these boards that the Reps are going to spin it either slightly or egregiously but certainly to SOME degree. All good. Just don't expect everyone to subscribe tgo everything a REP says as there is an agenda.

Are you insisting us "non-scientists" simply "buy into" the sales pitches/hype w/o demanding proof? Although you're frustrated, you do have to accept by virtue of your position as a rep for a company that you will be engaged in such dialogue (sometimes, annoying debates). This is not the USP forum, so you're going to get some challenges, some heat as well as praise. It's just the way it is for all companies (reps). ALL supplement companies are subjected to criticism as they are interacting with consumers directly and on an open discussion forum. For these reasons, I will never understand why USP or any companies get on the defensive.

Maintaining dialogue respectful and keeping things civil with the consumers will pay bigger dividends. Biting the hand that feeds you is simply not wise IMHO.

 

[Whacked]

LOL I didn't read your post before replying. I think I just stated a lot of the same.

My apologies

Why is the burden on proving it doesn't work instead of proving it does? After all this is a supplement a company is asking us to spend over 50 dollars on. Mad Chemist's concerns have no weight or bearing because he hasn't performed a double blind placebo controlled study on it? So if I said eat Dove soap for great gains the burden would be on someone to prove it doesn't work? And that they need a study to do it?

I'm not taking sides as I have no dogs in any fight, but am interested in discussion and science always. These debates by people like USP-Edu and Mad Chemist are how we learn.

 

[strategicmove]

Why is the burden on proving it doesn't work instead of proving it does? After all this is a supplement a company is asking us to spend over 50 dollars on. Mad Chemist's concerns have no weight or bearing because he hasn't performed a double blind placebo controlled study on it? So if I said eat Dove soap for great gains the burden would be on someone to prove it doesn't work? And that they need a study to do it?

I'm not taking sides as I have no dogs in any fight, but am interested in discussion and science always. These debates by people like USP-Edu and Mad Chemist are how we learn.

First of all, the science of the ingredients used in the product was(is) convincing. Yet, USPlabs did not stop there. It went ahead and conducted one of the most comprehensive beta-testing programs of any product in the supplement industry. The feedback was consistent - the product delivered. Based on this feedback, the product was launched. Had the beta-test results been negative, Compound-20 would not have made it to market.

Second, what kind of proof do you want to see? USPlabs has repeatedly shown, via science-backed agruments in this thread and elsewhere, why the product works. If USPlabs arguments are ignored, then it is unclear to me what the requested evidence should be. This is the basis for my requiring that we also see proof that the product does not work. And the only scientific gold-standard I know of is a double-blind placebo-controlled trial.

Now, something else: If you have a product with three ingredients, A, B, and C, and some research claims compound A or B, administered standalone, in animal models may not yield certain results, does that necessarily mean that compounds A, B, and C, will not work under any circumstances in human subjects, when administered simultaneously? Certainly not! Open-minded readers would have gleamed the persuasive nature of USPlabs' arguments by now. Yet, no matter what the science claims, the taste of the pudding, as they say, is in the eating. I can provide you with many examples of compounds that worked quite differently in humans than the science predicted. This is why we need to look at both sides of the coin - the science and real-world results presented in beta-test runs and non-sponsored logs. Science matters, but so do real-life results.

I personally have the impression that attacking USPlabs' products is a favorite forum past-time for some individuals. These same individuals either start or turn up in any such thread. It's like clock work. And they are never swayed, no matter the weight of the presented argument by USPlabs. Jack3d was attacked and challenged when it appeared. It went ahead and changed the pre-workout category forever (lowered prices for pre-workout and spurned countless spin-offs and copy-cats), and became most successful best-selling pre-workout ever. OxyELITE Pro endured similar attacks, but went ahead to dominate the fat-burning, becoming the best-selling fat-loss compound. ModernBCAA has been challenged for using an industry-new 8:1:1 ratio of BCAAs, completely ignoring the impact of mTOR in anabolic signaling, translation initiation, and related molecular processes, yet since the inception of ModernBCAA, some companies have followed with the same BCAA ratio and even higher. And the list goes on.

To summarize, Compound-20's effectiveness has been vindicated by countless objective reviews, and that is what counts. Proven results in real life.

 

[freezito]

First of all, the science of the ingredients used in the product was(is) convincing. Yet, USPlabs did not stop there. It went ahead and conducted one of the most comprehensive beta-testing programs of any product in the supplement industry. The feedback was consistent - the product delivered. Based on this feedback, the product was launched. Had the beta-test results been negative, Compound-20 would not have made it to market.

Second, what kind of proof do you want to see? USPlabs has repeatedly shown, via science-backed agruments in this thread and elsewhere, why the product works. If USPlabs arguments are ignored, then it is unclear to me what the requested evidence should be. This is the basis for my requiring that we also see proof that the product does not work. And the only scientific gold-standard I know of is a double-blind placebo-controlled trial.

Now, something else: If you have a product with three ingredients, A, B, and C, and some research claims compound A or B, administered standalone, in animal models may not yield certain results, does that necessarily mean that compounds A, B, and C, will not work under any circumstances in human subjects, when administered simultaneously? Certainly not! Open-minded readers would have gleamed the persuasive nature of USPlabs' arguments by now. Yet, no matter what the science claims, the taste of the pudding, as they say, is in the eating. I can provide you with many examples of compounds that worked quite differently in humans than the science predicted. This is why we need to look at both sides of the coin - the science and real-world results presented in beta-test runs and non-sponsored logs. Science matters, but so do real-life results.

I personally have the impression that attacking USPlabs' products is a favorite forum past-time for some individuals. These same individuals either start or turn up in any such thread. It's like clock work. And they are never swayed, no matter the weight of the presented argument by USPlabs. Jack3d was attacked and challenged when it appeared. It went ahead and changed the pre-workout category forever (lowered prices for pre-workout and spurned countless spin-offs and copy-cats), and became most successful best-selling pre-workout ever. OxyELITE Pro endured similar attacks, but went ahead to dominate the fat-burning, becoming the best-selling fat-loss compound. ModernBCAA has been challenged for using an industry-new 8:1:1 ratio of BCAAs, completely ignoring the impact of mTOR in anabolic signaling, translation initiation, and related molecular processes, yet since the inception of ModernBCAA, some companies have followed with the same BCAA ratio and even higher. And the list goes on.

To summarize, Compound-20's effectiveness has been vindicated by countless objective reviews, and that is what counts. Proven results in real life.

Your talking to deaf ears

 

[Whacked]

To summarize, Compound-20's effectiveness has been vindicated by countless objective reviews, and that is what counts. Proven results in real life.

To summarize, IF this were the case, we wouldn't be having this discussion

You don't see too many people arguing the effectiveness of creatine, stims, etc

Only time will reveal the truth for ALL to see.

I'm cautiously waiting to see what comes of this in a few more months after the hype-smoke clears.

I will be happy jump on the bandwagon (Just as I have with Cissus and PowerFULL fro YEARS now) and give it a go IF things pan out just as advertised (GINORMOUS shoes to fill there though in light of the claims)

PS: I have asked countless times now (along with several others) what the half life of this product is. I have been contacted by people in the know who are suggesting several MINUTES tops. If you have any science to refute this, please provide.

Thanks

 

[strategicmove]

Your talking to deaf ears

You are absolutely right.

 

[USPlabsRep]

In lieu of your postion as a company Rep, do you honestly want everyone to believe that your comments arent driven by bias too?

MadChemist is independent in this?

The issue is one sided biased thinking....

We both presented our sides. You can then engage an outside source to validate the truth.

 

[USPlabsRep]

To summarize, IF this were the case, we wouldn't be having this discussion

You don't see too many people arguing the effectiveness of creatine, stims, etc

Only time will reveal the truth for ALL to see.

I'm cautiously waiting to see what comes of this in a few more months after the hype-smoke clears.

I will be happy jump on the bandwagon (Just as I have with Cissus and PowerFULL fro YEARS now) and give it a go IF things pan out just as advertised (GINORMOUS shoes to fill there though in light of the claims)

PS: I have asked countless times now (along with several others) what the half life of this product is. I have been contacted by people in the know who are suggesting several MINUTES tops. If you have any science to refute this, please provide.

Thanks

Like I told you in another thread when you asked....we don't know the half life just like MadChemist doesn't know it...

What is the half life of DMAA? We don't know it....What is the half life of the majority of sport nutrition supplements...WE DONT KNOW IT!

We don't know the half life of Cissus either...

You should fall victim to fact not suggestion...

 

[Whacked]

I don't know who madchemist is or what his agenda is. NEver seen the guy until prior to this thread.

But - I have to ask: Why are you always so ANGRY?

With all the success you've been blessed with, you should be one happy dude. Moreover, your customers/potential customers should be treated like gold as we/they've played a significant role in the success you are enjoying today.

Have you forgotten your humble roots? Pat eluded to them in another thread so most are now aware how you got your start. Instead of being proud and thankful; you're condescending (at times) and ungrateful.

FWIW, it doesn't help you or your cause as the owner of a supplement company to have such a customer-unfreindly disposition.

Just some food for thought from and old cat.

I'll keep buying the CissusRx and PowerFULL but you don't make me want to givre you my money when you act in the aforementioned capacity. Me thinks many others share this exact same sentiment. Food for thought since revenue is the agenda

Be well and I wish you continued success in your endeavors.

 

[Geoforce]

I personally have the impression that attacking USPlabs' products is a favorite forum past-time for some individuals. These same individuals either start or turn up in any such thread. It's like clock work. And they are never swayed, no matter the weight of the presented argument by USPlabs. Jack3d was attacked and challenged when it appeared. It went ahead and changed the pre-workout category forever (lowered prices for pre-workout and spurned countless spin-offs and copy-cats), and became most successful best-selling pre-workout ever. OxyELITE Pro endured similar attacks, but went ahead to dominate the fat-burning, becoming the best-selling fat-loss compound. ModernBCAA has been challenged for using an industry-new 8:1:1 ratio of BCAAs, completely ignoring the impact of mTOR in anabolic signaling, translation initiation, and related molecular processes, yet since the inception of ModernBCAA, some companies have followed with the same BCAA ratio and even higher. And the list goes on.

I can assure you I've never been in any type of USP bashing thread and go back through my posts I'm not bashing here. I make 0 money if you guys are the number 1 supplement company and I make 0 money if you are the smallest supplement company running. I have absolutely no incentive or desire to run down a company or product. I do have an incentive as a consumer to question things. I do have an incentive as someone interested in learning to ask questions for my own knowledge. The paranoia may be warranted for some people, but not EVERY person who asks a question is interested in seeing USP fail. Clearly (as you state) the company has a history of sales success. Questions should be expected and welcomed by a company with such a high presence in the supplement industry...but that doesn't seem to be the case from this thread.

 

[freezito]

I can assure you I've never been in any type of USP bashing thread and go back through my posts I'm not bashing here. I make 0 money if you guys are the number 1 supplement company and I make 0 money if you are the smallest supplement company running. I have absolutely no incentive or desire to run down a company or product. I do have an incentive as a consumer to question things. I do have an incentive as someone interested in learning to ask questions for my own knowledge. The paranoia may be warranted for some people, but not EVERY person who asks a question is interested in seeing USP fail. Clearly (as you state) the company has a history of sales success. Questions should be expected and welcomed by a company with such a high presence in the supplement industry...but that doesn't seem to be the case from this thread.

Geoforce, I don't know that he was necessarily talking about you but you have to understand there are individuals that do this and it makes it hard to have any type of debate without them turning the post to hell. Bottom line is for anyo e, if you dont like a product, if don't think a prospect works, do t buy it and move on

 

[ax1]

Geoforce, I don't know that he was necessarily talking about you but you have to understand there are individuals that do this and it makes it hard to have any type of debate without them turning the post to hell. Bottom line is for anyo e, if you dont like a product, if don't think a prospect works, do t buy it and move on

Are you saying if you dont think a prospect works you shouldnt have the freedom to engage in dialogue and debate (in a respecful manner of course) on a public forum?

 

[USPlabsRep]

Are you saying if you dont think a prospect works you shouldnt have the freedom to engage in dialogue and debate (in a respecful manner of course) on a public forum?

You can't debate anonymity on an internetforum....it's who can get the most people in the thread to turn it..

We debated and provided our views and thenit turns into a mob mentality.. it's hard to debate anonymous people who don'thave to be held accountable. If this was a live debate, no one would have a legitimateopinion. It’s not objective and it's a waste of time beyond the initial Reponsesand becomes drama oriented. Nothing more or less.

If you don't like our clear, accurate andscientific response. If you don't care about our williness to put our product to the challenge in a real audience by beta testing and then trading product for objecitve logs. If you don't think gifting product for logs to skeptical members it valid..

I don't really care what you think after that process has taken place..

 

[ax1]

You can't debate anonymity on an internetforum....it's who can get the most people in the thread to turn it..

We debated and provided our views and thenit turns into a mob mentality.. it's hard to debate anonymous people who don'thave to be held accountable. If this was a live debate, no one would have a legitimateopinion. It’s not objective and it's a waste of time beyond the initial Reponsesand becomes drama oriented. Nothing more or less.

If you don't like our clear, accurate andscientific response. If you don't care about our williness to put our product to the challenge in a real audience by beta testing and then trading product for objecitve logs. If you don't think gifting product for logs to skeptical members it valid..

I don't really care what you think after that process has taken place..

What is wrong with you? Why are you responding to me like this?

 

[Celorza]

You can't debate anonymity on an internetforum....it's who can get the most people in the thread to turn it..

We debated and provided our views and thenit turns into a mob mentality.. it's hard to debate anonymous people who don'thave to be held accountable. If this was a live debate, no one would have a legitimateopinion. It’s not objective and it's a waste of time beyond the initial Reponsesand becomes drama oriented. Nothing more or less.

If you don't like our clear, accurate andscientific response. If you don't care about our williness to put our product to the challenge in a real audience by beta testing and then trading product for objecitve logs. If you don't think gifting product for logs to skeptical members it valid..

I don't really care what you think after that process has taken place..

You really act like a sensitive mother of a cub when threatened don't you? This is just the internet...take a chill pill, discussion has been made, those with a much mature view of the situation will take the science out of it and maybe try it out for themselves, those who like drama will enjoy your answers as much as any because you really do over react and even take it a bit far on the responses some times...Don't give into emotions , being a CEO of a company should mean more than protecting it like your child , should also be about being mature enough to accept life aint fair and not everyone is gonna like what you give out! I personally liked OEP , J3D and C20 myself , despite the fact some science may prove or argue C20 is ineffective , sometimes many supplements have awesome placebo effects on the minds of people to keep them motivated! That is also a win for the costumer...Relax a bit , just some advice.

 

[USPlabsRep]

You really act like a sensitive mother of a cub when threatened don't you? This is just the internet...take a chill pill, discussion has been made, those with a much mature view of the situation will take the science out of it and maybe try it out for themselves, those who like drama will enjoy your answers as much as any because you really do over react and even take it a bit far on the responses some times...Don't give into emotions , being a CEO of a company should mean more than protecting it like your child , should also be about being mature enough to accept life aint fair and not everyone is gonna like what you give out! I personally liked OEP , J3D and C20 myself , despite the fact some science may prove or argue C20 is ineffective , sometimes many supplements have awesome placebo effects on the minds of people to keep them motivated! That is also a win for the costumer...Relax a bit , just some advice.

To you it's "just the internet" and fun cool place to act like someone else..

Unlike your objective on the internet, this is my business.

 

[Celorza]

Lol...I act as just myself , Like i said , I enjoyed the products , but I think your business goes beyond AA forum dude...It goes to managing a company, running it and keep it in the direction its going , I think USP is a good solid supplement company, but then again , who am I? Just another customer who think the internet is just for fun...

 

[Whacked]

Somebody close this thread. :thanks:

It's now become retarded. :sucks:


Peace out y'all (UN-subscribing NOW)

 

[USPlabsRep]

Somebody close this thread. :thanks:

It's now become retarded. :sucks:


Peace out y'all (UN-subscribing NOW)

But the truth is we'll See you in my next Thread...

 

[ax1]

What is wrong with you? Why are you responding to me like this?

Waiting ^^

 

[Whacked]

Bro, Ive given USP plenty of props not only in THIS thread but several others. When challenging USP on claims, Im always sure to throw my disclaimer in (that I love CissusRx and PowerFull. Two quality supps! Props on bringing them to the market).

You're a little off the charts today man. Relax. My issue is and always has been SOLELY with overpimping and crazy claims. I have zero beef with USP - or any company on this board for that matter. Check all my past posts. you'll find ZERO attacking USP.

I jumped on C-20 b/c the hyping is way over the top and I wanted to engage in some conversations about the validity of said claims. No sooner than I did - I was attacked by the USP team (to be expected )

PS: I wonder if Mr Dunn (whom I have a great deal of respect for) will excoriate you publically for your posts and warn you as he did me (I've behaved ever since). If he is a FAIR Admin, the same should apply to members and companies alike.

Be well USP - get a massage, the heated debates and public displays of rage arent worth it.

But the truth is we'll See you in my next Thread...

 

[strategicmove]

How often have I un-subscribed from this thread? Once? Twice? Four times? Man, I need some FocusDirt!

 

[freezito]

Sorry hard to type on a phone sometimes

 

[LiveToLift]

MadChemist is independent in this?

The issue is one sided biased thinking....

We both presented our sides. You can then engage an outside source to validate the truth.

I have to agree that these guys are set in their beliefs on this one. I don't think you could show them a study conducted by the fda or any well known controlled lab proving C20 works and they would believe it. They would say that USP has become so rich off there "over glamorized products" that they have bought the lab out and are skewing results..... Just my opinion.

 

[Whacked]

How's one more time sound?

How often have I un-subscribed from this thread? Once? Twice? Four times? Man, I need some FocusDirt!

 

[USPlabsRep]

How's one more time sound?

http://www.anh-usa.org/fda-breaks-promise-on-proposed-new-supplement-rules/

 

[Clemenza]

http://www.anh-usa.org/fda-breaks-promise-on-proposed-new-supplement-rules/

Very very scary. This is the tip of the iceberg. Over 20,000 supplements won't be able to be sold as dietary supplements any longer.

I'm telling you this is more about politics than it is actually keeping supplement consumers safe. The pharma lobby is too huge. The current law allows for synthetic botanicals to be sold as dietary supplements. They are breaking their own laws and making up new rules as they go along.

 

[Clemenza]

By changing the law and not allowing supplement companies to use synthetic replicas of herbal botanical, the fda puts these companies in a position where they.can no longer afford the costs of natural extraction, and even if they can those costs are passed along to the consumers. The costs would be astronomical. Who's going to pay $100 for a month supply of milk thistle?

It's a lose lose situation for supplement companies.

Now on the other hand, pharma companies are allowed to produce these synthetic botanical s by law. The pharma companies now having the monopoly can produce them cheaply and sell them to consumers for whatever the hell price they want, without competition.

 

[Whacked]

Nail on head fellas

PS: Still subscribed! Ha!

http://www.anh-usa.org/fda-breaks-promise-on-proposed-new-supplement-rules/

Very very scary. This is the tip of the iceberg. Over 20,000 supplements won't be able to be sold as dietary supplements any longer.

I'm telling you this is more about politics than it is actually keeping supplement consumers safe. The pharma lobby is too huge. The current law allows for synthetic botanicals to be sold as dietary supplements. They are breaking their own laws and making up new rules as they go along.

 

[Clemenza]

Just started Compound 20 solo and logging it if you want to follow...

http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplement-reviews-logs/200323-compound-20-solo.html